Saturday, January 11, 2014

Musing on King Kong

You know, my original plan was to review the 1933 King Kong.
Then I reconsidered for one reason: too easy. It’s a great film. The characters
are two-dimensional but never unlikable. The special effects are amazing. The
direction, cinematography, and score make for a great film. The central idea is
inspired. This movie changed the filmmaking medium forever, and I consider it
the best-made film ever. Citizen Kane was just plain boring-it needed a giant
gorilla fighting dinosaurs.

Speaking of dinosaurs, this is what we’ll be discussing: Why
are there dinosaurs in King Kong and are they a good thing? Let’s start with behind the scenes.Following the success of 1925’s Lost World,
Willis O’Brien brainstormed another prehistoric jungle epic. With his
modelmaker Marcel Delgado, he created a lush jungle set and a host of
prehistoric beasts-Stegosaurus, Pteranodon, Tyrannosaurus, Styracosaurus,
Triceratops, Arsinoitherium and Brontosaurus. The project, called Creation, was
never filmed but for a single sequence featuring a mother Triceratops attacking
the killer of her child. However, as the Great Depression set in, RKO has their
rising director Merian C Cooper go over their current projects. Cooper read
through the script and dismissed the stock characters and meandering story, but
was entranced by the special effects in the test sequence.

When Cooper added O’Brien to his giant gorilla project, "O’Bie" (as he was nicknamed)
kept his dinosaurs. Cooper welcomed more opportunities for thrills, action, and
had already planned for a live-action tussle between a gorilla and a Komodo
dragon. After all, what’s a King without his subjects and conquests? So that’s why we have Karl Denham losing his
crew. Furthermore, they act as a plot device to threaten Anne Darrow so Kong
can protect her. And while Kong was
clearly the star, the dinosaurs added spectacle and excitement

A quick, cheap sequel followed the film’s successful
opening, featuring the Styracosaurus whose footage was cut from the original,
and some completely new, mostly fictional animals made up for the film. The Styracosaurus looks great, but that's because it was made and animated for Kong, but its scene was cut out. The new animals, however, are fairly shoddy and cheap-looking, showing that Delgado made them in a hurry. I do think that the other Skull Island denizens are essential and provide much-needed excitement in the film, but they're pale shadows of the previous dinosaurs.

Almost every Kong movie since has included dinosaurs. Toho
made the dinosaur fight the main event for their Kong, replacing Skull Island’s
dinosaurs for a giant octopus. But again, said dinosaur was Godzilla. Their
second Kong movie, King Kong Escapes, had their title super-ape kill a menacing
theropod named by the script and press as Gorosaurus to rescue his love
interest.

In Dino De Laurentiis's 1976 film and 1986
sequel, no dinosaurs are shown at all, the director and producer refusing to
pay for the stop-motion effects. Instead of Kong saving Ann from a Tyrannosaur,
he saves “Dwan” from a very fake looking snake, combining both the Tyrannosaur,
the “Elasmosaur”, and Pterosaur fights into one.The animated musical The Mighty Kong did
feature cartoon dinosaurs, with a Triceratops replacing the original
Stegosaurus, the requisite Tyrannosaurus, and Pterosaur attack. Said footage is
even briefer and more primitive than the original’s dinosaur sequences, despite
the animation allowing for more fantastic action.

Finally, the 2005 version took every dinosaur
scene and ramped it up in scale.While, like the musical, the Stegosaurus is
replaced by a ceratopsian, the other dinosaur sequences are far more elaborate.
Instead of a Brontosaurus attack on
Denham’s crew, there is a dromeosaur attack, brontosaur stampede, and attack by
a giant predatory fish. Instead of the Elasmosaurus and Tyrannosaurus in quick
succession, Kong fights three giant tyrannosaurs in a long, elaborate scene.
Instead of a single pterosaur distracting the gorilla for Ann to escape, it is
a flock of giant flying predatory rodents. Indeed, featurettes for the 2005
version show that Jackson and his team had dinosaurs in mind the whole time.
Jurassic Park might have influenced them, but it’s just as likely Jackson loved
dinosaurs as much as he loved everything else in the original Kong. Indeed, the second sequence shot for the film
was the Kong fight with the tyrannosaurs.

Now, the question arises: Does King Kong need
dinosaurs? Well, we’ve seen both approaches-most films with and two without. Those
with dinosaurs have received better reviews, and have plots far more faithful
to the original.But why? Kong is the
star attraction, and the dinosaurs are only for the Skull Island portion of the
film. They’re really not essential to the story.There are several books of essays on the
film, and outside those on the special effects, none of them even mention the
dinosaurs. So why?

I think it’s because people like dinosaurs.
Dinosaurs are weird and big and scary, and while Kong is spectacular enough,
they add a lot. If Kong isn’t going to menace Ann Darrow, then who is? Who does
Kong fight? Without the dangers, it’s harder to prove Kong’s dedication and
devotion to his captive. Without the dinosaurs, there are no action scenes in
the picture until Kong rampages through the Skull Island village. They add additional menace, thrills, and
spectacle to an already strong film.Simply put, you can’t make a King Kong movie without them.

Simply put, dinosaurs are fun. The website
TVtropes even has a page on media called “Everything’s better with dinosaurs”.
We love dinosaurs. I love dinosaurs. You love dinosaurs.And the only thing better than a giant
gorilla is one fighting dinosaurs. So yeah, I think that the better question is
“why not put dinosaurs in King Kong”?

About Me

Hi everyone! You may know me already, but 99% of you won't. I've decided to make a blog for myself. I'm a anthropology student who has returned to his original passion for palaeontology. Ever since I was little, I've been fascinated with the weird and wonderful animals that have inhabited our planet and I've made this blog to keep this in my mind and hopefully in yours. Most people blog about their interests, and while I've got a range of interests-see history and anthropology above, not to mention zoology, astronomy, art, cooking, science fiction and fantasy films and literature, and a myriad of others, the one I want to do for a living is the study of Earth's ancient past.

On this blog I'll review papers, talk about fossils, museums, and taxa, review art, film, literature, and our culture's view of paleontology, and share memories and insights. I've been inspired by the far better blogs of professional palaeontologists, and I'll share them as time goes on. I'm also open to requests and questions of opinions, the latest palaeo news, and discussions with other fans informal and professional.

I think this is going to have fun, and I'm hoping my readers will have just as much fun.

Copyright: All media and print reviewed belongs to the owners and publishers. Likewise, all art used for this blog belongs to their artists. This is a non-profit blog for education and entertainment.